HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Brad Richards

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-23-2007, 09:57 AM
  #1
MU_Beerman
Registered User
 
MU_Beerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
Brad Richards

With Tampa reportedly interested in lowering payroll, tis becoming more and more likely that they'll move one of the big three. However, with Lecavalier's season last year, and Marty's NTC, together with Richards' salary and down year, it appears he's the most likely to be moved.

Seeing as the Blues have the most cap space of many teams in the league, they are in a unique position to bid for Richards. If it could be accomplished w/out affecting the rebuild, would anyone be interested? Maybe dealing from our defense strength as well as a goalie prospect, maybe throw in a draft pick or two? AM says he wants a big centerman, Richards fits the bill.

MU_Beerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 10:05 AM
  #2
SIU LAW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 471
vCash: 500
Assuming for the sake of discussion Tampa is willing to deal, the only problem with a deal is Richards bloated salary. With salaries rising, eventually the Blues are going to have to buck up and pay elite dollars (example: Havlat’s salary) for a star, vet forward (is the time now?). However, Richards’ contract currently is above what other elite players are getting right now. Perhaps UFA center signings this summer will show where the market is headed and whether Richards’ contract is in line with those signings.

Putting dollars aside, I would love to pick up Richards. Because my girlfriend’s "team in the East" is Tampa, I see him play quite a bit. He had an off year in terms of production, but he is a great talent that should be the #1 man on some team. 5-on-5, power play, penalty kill…you name it, he does it well.

SIU LAW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 10:12 AM
  #3
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MU_Beerman View Post
With Tampa reportedly interested in lowering payroll, tis becoming more and more likely that they'll move one of the big three. However, with Lecavalier's season last year, and Marty's NTC, together with Richards' salary and down year, it appears he's the most likely to be moved.

Seeing as the Blues have the most cap space of many teams in the league, they are in a unique position to bid for Richards. If it could be accomplished w/out affecting the rebuild, would anyone be interested? Maybe dealing from our defense strength as well as a goalie prospect, maybe throw in a draft pick or two? AM says he wants a big centerman, Richards fits the bill.
Richards, at 6-00, 198, is not particularly big, not is he physical, as noted by the Toronto Star/TSN.

He is durable, however, having missed only two regular-season games over six NHL seasons, so The Star's argument about wearing down may not hold water.

Still, Richards scored 21 fewer points this year than last -- his lowest point, and assist, totals in four years. Not a positive sign for a center who's primary asset is his playmaking ability. He also went from an even plus/minus last year to a minus-19 this year. And that contract...

I just don't see Brad Richards as a primary option for this team. I think he's gotten fat and happy (figuratively speaking) with that huge contract, and has lost a bit of his edge. I could be wrong, considering that he managed eight points in six playoff games for the 'Bolts, but that contract, and the sharp decline in regular-season production from his career year last year after signing the Big Kontrak, sends up a red flag for me.

P_B


Prussian_Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 10:52 AM
  #4
barnburner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
More than likely, a change in location, coupled with playing for Murray, might take care of any "fat cat" mentality he might have had.
The contract however - is a problem.

If it was economically reasonable - I'd love to see him here.

barnburner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 11:20 AM
  #5
2ForRoughing*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
a package of one of our first rounders, a goalie prospect (anybody but Schwarz) and a young defenseman should get the job done I'd think. Maybe the legendary "2nd rounder" added to make things a bit more reasonable from a HFBoards perspective... because we all know a 2nd round pick sways *every* deal no matter how lopsided. Seriously though that's about all I'd give up for Richards at this point given his contractual obligations.

2ForRoughing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 11:32 AM
  #6
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
Yeah, I know - the contract is bad ... but if we hit the open market, we could end up spending nearly that much on a #1 center (depending on how hog wild the market gets). Richards is definitely a #1 center, and more importantly shows up for the postseason: in his first playoff, he was 0-5-5 in 11 games. Since then? 34 games, 18 goals, 24 assists, 42 points; in the last 2 years, 11 GP, 6-10-16.

If he's available, I'd absolutely consider striking a deal for him. He instantly makes this team *much* stronger, and potentially fills a hole on this team for the next 6-7 years. The only question will be which of our top prospects we're willing to part with to get him, because a pair of 1st-round picks won't cut it.

__________________
No promises this time.
Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 11:43 AM
  #7
Quaz
Registered User
 
Quaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: St Louis
Posts: 328
vCash: 500
How many years is Richard's signed for at $7.8M? That is currently a huge impact on the cap. I don't think many teams could afford to add him, therefore I don't think it would take as much as everyone thinks to land him. BTW, I think it would be a great move for the Blues if they could somehow pull this off. Otherwise your probably looking at $6M+/yr. w/ someone like Gomez.

Quaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 11:51 AM
  #8
barnburner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
Another question - does Richards have a NTC? If not - a trade for him might be better than going after one of the premier f/a centers like Gomez or Drury, because you have to figure they are going to be reluctant to sign with the Blues in the midst of a rebuilding job.

barnburner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 11:54 AM
  #9
Butchered
Whatchu doin Cooper?
 
Butchered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 501
Country: United States
Posts: 4,319
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Butchered
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian_Blue View Post
Richards, at 6-00, 198, is not particularly big, not is he physical, as noted by the Toronto Star/TSN.

He is durable, however, having missed only two regular-season games over six NHL seasons, so The Star's argument about wearing down may not hold water.

Still, Richards scored 21 fewer points this year than last -- his lowest point, and assist, totals in four years. Not a positive sign for a center who's primary asset is his playmaking ability. He also went from an even plus/minus last year to a minus-19 this year. And that contract...

I just don't see Brad Richards as a primary option for this team. I think he's gotten fat and happy (figuratively speaking) with that huge contract, and has lost a bit of his edge. I could be wrong, considering that he managed eight points in six playoff games for the 'Bolts, but that contract, and the sharp decline in regular-season production from his career year last year after signing the Big Kontrak, sends up a red flag for me.

P_B

Honestly, your assist totals would drop too if you had Eric Perrin and Jason Ward as your wingers. I don't like Richards at all, and I would love to see him elsewhere, but in the sake of fairness, if he had even halfway competent wingers that could finish, those assists would be way up.

Butchered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 12:04 PM
  #10
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues View Post
Yeah, I know - the contract is bad ... but if we hit the open market, we could end up spending nearly that much on a #1 center (depending on how hog wild the market gets). Richards is definitely a #1 center, and more importantly shows up for the postseason: in his first playoff, he was 0-5-5 in 11 games. Since then? 34 games, 18 goals, 24 assists, 42 points; in the last 2 years, 11 GP, 6-10-16.

If he's available, I'd absolutely consider striking a deal for him. He instantly makes this team *much* stronger, and potentially fills a hole on this team for the next 6-7 years. The only question will be which of our top prospects we're willing to part with to get him, because a pair of 1st-round picks won't cut it.
Definitely agree with you on this one IB, except for the price. I don't know what Tampa would ask for, but there is no way we give up a top prospect. Tampa is in the bind not us. So I would imagine that the price for Richards, even thou he is a top centerman talent, is going to be lower due to the fact that someone has to be able to fit that contract under the cap.

But with some of the moves that JD and company made at the trade deadline, which I think was pretty darn good. I think that JD would be able to pry Richards out of tampa for a 1st/4th and a middle range prospect.

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 12:16 PM
  #11
Butchered
Whatchu doin Cooper?
 
Butchered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 501
Country: United States
Posts: 4,319
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Butchered
The illusion here is that Tampa is a bind. The team they iced this year was more or less a 3-4 man team with very, very average goaltending.

Obviously, with ANY ammount of secondary scoring and even normally average goaltending, this team would be in much better shape. Tampa has a lot of dead weight coming off next season in Andreychuk and Burke. Easily replaced UFAs in Fedotenko and Sarich. Lots of money is going to be freed up, especially if we can dump Denis, and we will be able to. When the LA Kings need Sean Burke from us to have a starting goaltender, someone will take Denis, even if it's straight up for a late pick.

Obviously everyone has an opinion, but as a Tampa fan, seeing everyone else tell us constantly how much of a bind we're in, and how we need to trade STAR players (do not get confused. High contract yes, poor year by his standards, yes, but that does not mean he isn't a STAR in this league, and is a number one center on most teams in this league without an elite centeR) for trash, it gets a little frustrating.

A first/fourth and a "mid range" prospect does NOT get you an elite center. No matter what the other teams situation.

Butchered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 12:50 PM
  #12
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
I agree, and I think Tampa is actually better off than most people think wrt the cap. What really screws them right now is having Marc Denis signed for another 2 years with Johan Holmqvist clearly holding the reins as the #1 goalie and Kari Ramo possibly ready to be the backup; the Lightning don't have the money to just bury Denis in the minors and get him off the cap, and they surely don't want a $2,866,667 backup.

They have about $32.9 million in 10 players, and Tim Taylor ($650K) counts no matter what in '07-08 due to the "35 and older" clause, and through QO's they can probably add another 6 guys for $4 million total ... but after that, they'll be relying on what little depth they have on the farm and hoping to pick through the bargain bin after the first wave or two of UFA signings. The best thing they can do is hope someone wants Denis and dump him for little or nothing, but that will be easier said than done.

I'll also agree that Tampa will get more than a 1st and a 4th for Richards if they trade him ... but if Tampa is self-imposing a cap, other teams will see how the numbers work out and know the Lightning are in a bind if they want to make a deal - and that will work his trade value down. How much will it go down? Not sure, b/c I don't have a solid read on what his actual trade value might be to start with ... but it's safe to say that Tampa wouldn't get it if they wanted to deal him.

Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 12:58 PM
  #13
MU_Beerman
Registered User
 
MU_Beerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
The unfortunate thing, from the Blues perspective, is this guy is a HUGE piece of their offense, and surely they'll want to replace some of that. The Blues aren't in a position to trade forward depth, IMO.

MU_Beerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 01:05 PM
  #14
Stealth JD
Drexel's dead!!!
 
Stealth JD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Safari Motor Motel
Country: United States
Posts: 6,193
vCash: 500
Since it's coming anyway (a bid, that is)....

To Tampa Bay:
Backman, Boyes, Jackson & 2007 ATL 1st

To STL:
Richards

Stealth JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 01:24 PM
  #15
Butchered
Whatchu doin Cooper?
 
Butchered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 501
Country: United States
Posts: 4,319
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Butchered
I don't think any team is going to give the world, but certainly, Tampa isn't begging teams to take him. He's still a monster in the playoffs, he's still a workhorse, he's still the same Brad Richards everyone was in love with just one season ago. The team he had around him was quite poor, and he suffered as well. There is a GM that will understand exactly what Richards is, and what he's worth, and they will pay accordingly.

His contract is huge, but so was Lecavaliers until he did what he did this season. Now that we have a cap, it's much more of a "what have you done for me lately" kind of league.

Butchered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 02:58 PM
  #16
2ForRoughing*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
problem is if we trade Boyes we don't have any wingers to pair with Richards. We'd still have the same issue we face with Weight - a playmaker and no finishers to pair them with. I don't see the purpose of getting a guy like Richards and playing him with Mayers.

2ForRoughing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 03:22 PM
  #17
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ForRoughing View Post
problem is if we trade Boyes we don't have any wingers to pair with Richards. We'd still have the same issue we face with Weight - a playmaker and no finishers to pair them with. I don't see the purpose of getting a guy like Richards and playing him with Mayers.

While I am VERY adamant against trading Boyes(I expect this kid to be one of our leading scorers next year), I will point out a few things.

1) Stempniak and Backes would still be here. Ideally you put Richards between those two and hope he turns Stempy into a 35-40 goal scorer and helps Backes get to the 20 mark.

2) As Strickland allude to in his last blog; keeping Weight on the wing is an option alos. I don't really like the look of this line; but worst case scenario you can put Richards with Weight and Rucinsky(that's WAY too much passing on 1 line IMO but this IS a worst case scenario I'm discussing). There's also Cajanek who was on FIRE to close out the season.

EIther way; we won't be putting Richards on an island like Tampa did. Asking him to turn apples into oranges is one thing; but just asking him to re-define his role(become more of a shooter than passer) isn't too much to ask.

kimzey59 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 04:20 PM
  #18
MU_Beerman
Registered User
 
MU_Beerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
with Mcclement, Boyes, RJ, and Weight who can all play center, I see no way Cajanek is brought back for next season. He was so much more visible at the end b/c of how INvisible he was until the last 20 games.

MU_Beerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 04:58 PM
  #19
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MU_Beerman View Post
with Mcclement, Boyes, RJ, and Weight who can all play center,
1) Boyes may be able to play center; but he has played EXCLUSIVELY at RW at the NHL level.

2) See Strickland's latest blog. Apparently there is talk of moving Weight to the wing(I don't see it happening as we just don't have the money to add 2 scoring line centers but it might be experimented with at some point during the year; especially if injuries start piling up).


Quote:
I see no way Cajanek is brought back for next season. He was so much more visible at the end b/c of how INvisible he was until the last 20 games.
1) Cajanek is already signed for next year. It's not a question of "bringing him back"; it's a question of "how do we get rid of him".

2) Certainly part of it was his invisible players earlier; but there is absolutely NO DENYING that he was lighting it up to close out the season.

In the final 20 games of the season(20 games is more than just a "hot streak"); Cajanek had 7 goals and 7 assists for 14 points(was +7 over that stretch). That projects to a 29-29-58 stat line over a full season. I would take that from a 2nd line winger ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.

In all honesty; after he was waived I thought it was almost a certainty that Cajanek would be bought out. Right now; though, I think he would be an interesting fit next to McClement on the 3rd line(interesting enough for me to keep him around in any case). If the guy focuses more on shooting the puck(it's always infuriated me that he didn't shoot the puck more often; he really does have a good shot) and plays with even a LITTLE amount of intensity he might be that "supplemental 20 goal scorer" that everybody wants us to sign.

kimzey59 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 05:55 PM
  #20
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
1) Boyes may be able to play center; but he has played EXCLUSIVELY at RW at the NHL level.

2) See Strickland's latest blog. Apparently there is talk of moving Weight to the wing(I don't see it happening as we just don't have the money to add 2 scoring line centers but it might be experimented with at some point during the year; especially if injuries start piling up).




1) Cajanek is already signed for next year. It's not a question of "bringing him back"; it's a question of "how do we get rid of him".

2) Certainly part of it was his invisible players earlier; but there is absolutely NO DENYING that he was lighting it up to close out the season.

In the final 20 games of the season(20 games is more than just a "hot streak"); Cajanek had 7 goals and 7 assists for 14 points(was +7 over that stretch). That projects to a 29-29-58 stat line over a full season. I would take that from a 2nd line winger ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.

In all honesty; after he was waived I thought it was almost a certainty that Cajanek would be bought out. Right now; though, I think he would be an interesting fit next to McClement on the 3rd line(interesting enough for me to keep him around in any case). If the guy focuses more on shooting the puck(it's always infuriated me that he didn't shoot the puck more often; he really does have a good shot) and plays with even a LITTLE amount of intensity he might be that "supplemental 20 goal scorer" that everybody wants us to sign.
I wonder if Cajanek played well enough at the end of last year to elevate his value so that he's at least tradeable. Even if it is for a 7th round pick, it still gets his contract off our books and opens up a spot for someone who will give a constant effort. Cajanek has had 20 gmae stretches similar to the one he ended last year on before. He just can't put together a full season. He's been teasing the team with his talent for a while now and it's time for him to go.

We could add two scoring line centers. It'd just have to be on something creative. We could trade for Lombardi (or someone similar) to be our 2nd line center and then go out and sign Drury to play our top line. If Brad Richards is coming through trade, I don't think we'll have the money to add another center through free agency. I think the whole "Weight at wing" thing is to open a spot for Soderberg if he has a good camp. In other words, it's unlikely Weight will be moved, but if Soderberg shows he belongs, we can be flexible to make it happen.

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 06:16 PM
  #21
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
Cajanek has had 20 gmae stretches similar to the one he ended last year on before.
Not in terms of goal scoring, he hasn't.
This years stretch was BY FAR Cajanek's most impressive run of goal scoring in his NHL career. Cajanek has had stretches before where you thought he MIGHT be getting it as a playmaker; but never has he impressed as a goal scorer.

Quote:
He just can't put together a full season. He's been teasing the team with his talent for a while now and it's time for him to go.
1) Cajanek's problem before was simple: the team had him on a line with either Tkachuk or Demitra and Cajanek got it in his head that he was supposed to be a "Super Set-up man". When he got into that mindset he stopped shooting the puck and he struggled as a result. If he's kept on the wing; he won't have a CHANCE to get into that mindset. He'll be able to focus on shooting the puck and he'll score more goals as a result. Personally; I'm intrigued as to exactly how many more goals he can get. I honestly think that Cajanek can hit the 20 mark if he's kept on the wing all of next year. He may only have 30-35 points; but his goal totals will be WAY up from his career norm.

2) I may be alone on this; but I think Murray can find ways to keep Cajanek motivated(passing through waivers gave Murray a LOT of weapons to throw against Cajanek). IMO it's at least something we should explore before just dumping Cajanek entirely. The guy has a LOT of talent; and that's something we could use on the 3rd line right now.

Quote:
We could add two scoring line centers. It'd just have to be on something creative. We could trade for Lombardi (or someone similar) to be our 2nd line center and then go out and sign Drury to play our top line. If Brad Richards is coming through trade, I don't think we'll have the money to add another center through free agency.
Maybe; but I think that is more moves than this team has the money for.

Quote:
I think the whole "Weight at wing" thing is to open a spot for Soderberg if he has a good camp. In other words, it's unlikely Weight will be moved, but if Soderberg shows he belongs, we can be flexible to make it happen.
Now THIS I might be tempted to believe. I still don't think Weight will be moved from Center; but if it's to make room for a youngster I can see JD or Murray pressing the issue with Weight.

kimzey59 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 06:27 PM
  #22
MU_Beerman
Registered User
 
MU_Beerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 482
vCash: 500
I had thought that Cajanek deal was only for one year, oops. I agree that he deferred to Demitra and Walt.

I'd love to see Soderberg make the team out of camp, that would certainly solve a lot of our problems. But isn't he projected to come back later than that? I remember hearing something about November, I could be wrong.

MU_Beerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 06:34 PM
  #23
fcpremix88
Registered User
 
fcpremix88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 2,844
vCash: 602
Brad Richards is a full package and is possibly the best 2-way player in the league. With Murray, I think he'd excel with shorter shifts and Stempniak/Backes as wingers line. Richards would also fit in with the youth (he's 26) and who needs him to be physical when you have King, Mayers, Hinote, RJ, and our defense?

His NTC kicks in July 1st. And, according to the Lightning HF board, we'd need to give up truly amazing prospects (Oshie). Dunno if its worth it though with Drury and Gomez on the market.

fcpremix88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 06:49 PM
  #24
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
Oshie and Johnson are non-starters, period. After that, I wouldn't rule out any of our prospects in a trade. (Note: Stempniak isn't a prospect.)

Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2007, 06:49 PM
  #25
coolhandluke2410
"BleedBlue44"
 
coolhandluke2410's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 2,639
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to coolhandluke2410 Send a message via Yahoo to coolhandluke2410
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiodos View Post
Brad Richards is a full package and is possibly the best 2-way player in the league. With Murray, I think he'd excel with shorter shifts and Stempniak/Backes as wingers line. Richards would also fit in with the youth (he's 26) and who needs him to be physical when you have King, Mayers, Hinote, RJ, and our defense?

His NTC kicks in July 1st. And, according to the Lightning HF board, we'd need to give up truly amazing prospects (Oshie). Dunno if its worth it though with Drury and Gomez on the market.
no chance Oshie is traded

coolhandluke2410 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:06 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.